Saunders v. Gilmer

Decided July 1, 1852

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1852-07-01

<p>Where the petition alleged that one defendant resided in Anderson county and the other in Cherokee county, where the anil wan instifulcd.and process was directed to the sheriff of Cherokee eomity and was returned by him served upon both defendants: Held, There was no error, (he presumption being that the defendant who resided in Anderson was found in the county of Cherokee.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1940

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1852-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wheeler, J.

¶1That the sheriff of the county in which suit was properly instituted was authorized to serve process oil all tiie defendants found in his county, wherever they were alleged to reside, cannot admit of a question.

¶2Tiie case of Ward v. Lattimer, (2 Tex. R., 245,) cited by the plaintiffs in error, was unlike tiie present. In that case botli defendants resided in the county where suit was instituted, and the citation was served on one of them in a different county. The ease therefore presented a very different question from the present.

¶3Judgment affirmed, with damages.